Governmental sovereignty is created and maintained by mutual respect for the rule of law by the government and citizens. To maintain legitimacy, a government must act within the bounds of the contract that created it. Otherwise, the relationship founded by said contract would be nullified, as would the duties and obligations that flow from that relationship. Torture exemplifies an ultra vires act used by the United States to show the consequences of over-extended authority on political legitimacy and the rule of law. Founded on the philosophies of Hugo Grotius, Thomas Hobbes, and Christine Korsgaard, this research investigates the nature of a government, its authority, and the laws that it must obey. By considering the role of a government as an artificial man or a representative agent, I argue that regardless of the limits or lack thereof for governmental power, the self-interest of a government illegalizes any action that violates its founding documents. If a government does commit such an act, the rule of law is negatively affected, and political legitimacy and authority are damaged. This behavior, when repeated and unamended, will destroy the relationship between the people and their government, diminish the contract, and return the people to a state of nature.

[pt] Esta tese tem como objetivo recuperar o processo de formação do pensamento moderno a partir de um ponto de vista mais abrangente sobre esse fenômeno histórico. Lançando mão de análises provenientes da filosofia política que recuperam sentidos legítimos para a emergência conceitual da modernidade, e da produção historiográfica recente sobre o iluminismo radical, propõe-se uma investigação de tal fenômeno de modo mais complexo a fim de identificar as principais disputas teóricas em jogo, bem como os divergentes programas sociais e políticos afirmados no período, notadamente aqueles que guardam relação com as noções sobre igualdade, liberdade e direitos. Com isso, pretende-se oferecer um exame aprofundado dessa época, sob sua dimensão conflitiva e em sua temporalidade múltipla, com a finalidade de explorar e afirmar teoricamente conceitos e práticas radicais legadas pelas modernidade para atualizar o sentido dos direitos hoje. / [en] The aim of this dissertation is to reconsider certain aspects of the development of modern thought by bringing a more wide-ranging perspective to that historical phenomenon. Drawing on a set of analyses from political philosophy that recognize the legitimacy of the conceptual emergence of modernity, as well as from recent historiographic work on the radical enlightenment, it seeks to examine the development of modern thought in a more complex fashion in order to identify the principal theoretical disputes and divergent social and political programs claimed during the period in question, most notably those related to notions of equality, liberty and rights. The objective of the dissertation is thus to offer a deeper consideration of the period, of its conflictive dimension and its multiple temporalities, with the ultimate purpose of theoretically exploring and asserting a set of radical definitions and practices inherited from modernity that remain relevant for conceiving of rights.

<p>Canadian courts have struggled to develop a consistent and coherent approach for reviewing administrative decision-making. In particular, they have been unable to create a workable framework that will guide when the courts will show deference to administrative tribunal interpretations of law and when they will interfere with them, leading to a system of administrative law that is unpredictable and disorderly. This thesis develops a novel approach to administrative review centered on a conception of judicial due-deference that is correlated with a Razian account of legitimate authority. My argument is that administrative review is best understood as an exercise of inter-institutional decision-making in which diverse institutions within the meta-institution of government must work together to arrive at decisions that best secure government objectives. When reviewing courts recognize that administrative actors are better situated in particular circumstances to make decisions than the courts, they ought to show deference. On the other hand, when courts are better situated to handle these matters, deference is not to be shown. I begin in Part I by analyzing the history of Canadian administrative law jurisprudence through to the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in <em>Dunsmuir</em>, highlighting the competing principles of the rule of law and democracy that animate the ‘Diceyan Dialectic’. In Part II, I articulate a complex theory of inter-institutional reasoning that demonstrates the important role of deference and authority in good government decision-making. In Part III, I apply this model to the circumstances of Canadian administrative review. I show how there are certain institutional strengths, as well as key limitations, with respect to how our superior courts can play a role in upholding the Rule of Law and democracy. Ultimately, I argue that the superior courts must pay attention to the unique institutional placement of administrative actors relative to them in order to discern if these non-curial actors possess greater authority and hence ought to be shown deference.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

本論文之主要論旨，在於探討公平正義是否可能在裁判之過程中獲得實現。筆者主要透過德沃金的法理論以及平等理論作為討論的出發點。筆者首先對於德沃金的理論進行相關的分析與討論。德沃金的法理論主要可區分為四個部分，包括：語義階段，法理階段，原理階段，以及裁判階段。在語義階段，德沃金指出，法律的概念，必須要作為一個詮釋性概念；在法理階段，德沃金將法律的概念當成一種政治價值的概念。德沃金認為，法律的概念所表彰的政治價值，便是「合法性價值」，亦即「法治」。進一步，德沃金指出，對於「合法性價值」與「法律的概念」的最佳理解，便是「整全性」。筆者認為，「整全性」是一個連接德沃金的「法理論」以及「平等理論」的關鍵概念。在《法律帝國》一書當中，德沃金主張：裁判的整全性，要求法官適用由公平與正義原則所推導出來的法律。這樣的主張，將我們帶向德沃金的平等理論。 德沃金的平等理論可以區分為兩個層面，一為討論關於分配正義的資源平等理論，另一為關乎政治權力分配的政治平等理論。這兩個概念，提供了司法裁判實踐公平正義的可能性。資源平等理論提供了相關的判準，可以使法院在裁判具體個案時得以援引，以判斷公民所擁有的具體權利，以及政府是否違反了在平等關懷下所需踐行的平等保護原則，而導致侵害人民的權利。同時，政治平等理論則為民主制度下的司法審查，提供其理論基礎。 最後，德沃金指出，關於裁判如何適用法律於具體個案的裁判過程，其與上述三階段有密切的關聯性。德沃金認為，在此一階段中，他與法實證主義者最大的不同，便是在於對於法官的裁量權的理解。德沃金認為，在其法理論體系當中，法官對裁量權的行使，是一種法律義務，而非如法實證主義者所稱，是一種道德責任。 不可避免的，對於德沃金的理論，存在有許多的反對意見。在此筆者援引了Joseph Raz以及Samuel Schaffler的論文，對德沃金的理論進行檢試。Raz指出，德沃金的理論本身，與其所主張的融貫並未有直接的關係，同時，德沃金的理論，忽略了權威在現代國家中所扮演的角色。Schaffler則指出，德沃金過份的強調經濟平等，因而致政治或社會平等遭到忽視。此外，Schaffler認為，德沃金的資源平等理論裡，欠缺對於境況與志向的區分標準。最後，Schaffler則是提到，德沃金的資源平等理論，隱藏著存在階級社會的可能性。 的確，Joseph Raz以及Samuel Schaffler的論文提供了反思性的觀點，不過，筆者認為，他們所提出的問題，無法成功的全然拒絕德沃金的理論。筆者認為，德沃金的法理論，成功的融合了「法治」以及「正義」與「公平」，因此，其理論也確實為司法裁判實踐公平正義的理念，提供了可能了路徑。 關鍵字：公平、正義、語義階段，法理階段，原理階段，裁判階段、法理論、平等、整全性、融貫、平等關懷 / The main issue of my thesis focuses on whether realization of the ideal of justice and fairness in adjudication is possible. I discuss this main issue by means of Dworkin’s legal theory and his theory of equality. First of all, I start my discussion with analysis of Dworkin’s legal theory, which includes four stages: the semantic stage, the jurisprudential stage, the doctrinal stage, and the adjudicative stage. In semantic stage, Dworkin points out that the concept of law should be interpretive concept. In jurisprudential stage, he deems the concept of law as a concept of political values, and what the value presented by concept of law is the value of legality. Furthermore, he considers the best concept of the value of the legality, so as the best conception of law, is integrity. I believe this is the key concept which connects Dworkin’s legal theory with theory of equality. In Law’s Empire, Dworkin said that integrity in adjudication asks judges apply the laws which come from the principle of justice and fairness. This leads us to Dworkin’s theory of equality. Dworkin presents his theory of Equality with two dimensions. One is equality of resources, which could be narrowly seen as a theory about distributive justice. The other is political equality concerning the distribution of political power. These two dimensions of his theory of equality offer the possibility of realizing the justice and fairness in adjudication. The theory of equality of resources offers the guidelines for courts to follow when deciding if citizens have some sort of concrete rights, and if government violates the equal protection of citizen’s rights that demanded by the ideal of equal concern. According to political equality, it offers the basis of judicial review in democracy. Finally, Dworkin points out that how judges apply laws to concrete case is something related to those three stages as mentioned above. Dworkin distinguishes himself from the legal positivists, such as Hans Kelsen and H.L.A. Hart. The different between Dworkin and legal positivists is discretion power of judges. In his theory, it is judge’s legal obligation rather than moral responsibility as positivists regard. Inevitably, there are some critics to Dworkin’s theory of equality. Here I cited the research of Joseph Raz and Samuel Schaffler to exam Dworkin’s theory. Their articles offer reflective points of view to me. Joseph Raz criticizes Dworkin’s theory as something irrelative to the coherence that Dworkin himself requests. He further criticizes that Dworkin’s theory of adjudication ignores the role of authority in modern state. Samuel Scheffler criticizes that Dworkin’s theory of equality ignores the importance of political and social equality. Besides, how to distinguish circumstance and ambition is not clear enough in Dworkin’s theory. Furthermore, Scheffler considers that Dworkin’s theory of equality may allow a heirachy administration exists. Although they point out some defects, I do not think they did fulfill significant challenges to Dworkin’s theory. After all, I consider that Dworkin’s legal theories build up a perfect framework for realizing the value of legality, which can also be referred as the rule of law. Most importantly, his legal theories are coherent the other moral values and convictions of ethics. I think Dworkin’s theories of law and equality may offer the best possibility to realize the ideal of justice and fairness in adjudication. Key Words: justice, fairness, the semantic stage, the jurisprudential stage, the doctrinal stage, the adjudicative stage, integrity, coherence, legal theory, equality, equal concern

Le présent mémoire est consacré à l'étude des chevauchements entre revendications territoriales autochtones. On s'y interroge sur l’origine et l’évolution de ces chevauchements ainsi que sur les mécanismes qui pourraient être employés pour trouver des solutions acceptables pour toutes les parties. Notre étude retrace d'abord l'évolution du critère d’exclusivité élaboré par les politiques et décisions judiciaires canadiennes relativement à l’octroi du titre autochtone, concluant que ce critère d’exclusivité est devenu un enjeu déterminant dans l’élaboration d’une solution relative aux chevauchements entre revendications territoriales. En observant la manière dont les différents paliers de gouvernement ont échoué dans leurs tentatives de solutionner les enjeux de chevauchement, nous constatons que les traditions juridiques autochtones doivent être intégrées à la résolution des conflits et à l’interprétation du critère d’exclusivité. Ceci exige de percevoir l’institution juridique de la résolution de conflits selon une certaine vision du droit. Nous utilisons ici celle de Lon Fuller, qui présente une approche permettant de réconcilier plusieurs traditions juridiques. Notre étude nous conduit à proposer le système du Indigenous Legal Lodge comme mécanisme de résolution de conflit permettant aux autochtones de faire appel à leurs traditions juridiques dans la résolution des chevauchements, permettant ainsi de réconcilier ces traditions diverses. / This thesis is dedicated to the study of overlapping aboriginal land claims. We question the origin and evolution of these overlaps and study the mechanisms which could be used in order to determine a solution acceptable to all parties. Our study first discusses the evolution of the exclusivity criterion developed in Canadian policy and case law relating to the granting of an aboriginal title, concluding that the criterion of exclusivity has become a defining issue in the development of a solution to overlaps between land claims. By observing the failures of the various levels of government in their attempts to develop solutions to overlapping claims, we find that Aboriginal legal traditions must be integrated into conflict resolution and be used when interpreting the exclusivity criterion. This requires us to perceive conflict resolution, as a legal institution, according to a certain understanding of the law. We use Lon Fuller’s vision, who presents an approach for reconciling various legal traditions. Our study brings us to propose the Indigenous Legal Lodge as a conflict resolution mechanism enabling Aboriginal groups to call upon their own legal traditions in resolving overlaps and to reconcile their differing traditions.

This PhD dissertation is about legal fictions in private law. A legal fiction, broadly, is a false assumption knowingly relied upon by the courts. The main aim of the dissertation is to formulate a test for which fictions should be accepted and which rejected. Subsidiary aims include a better understanding of the fiction as a device and of certain individual fictions, past and present. This research is undertaken, primarily, to establish a rigorous system for the treatment of fictions in English law - which is lacking. Secondarily, it is intended to settle some intractable disputes, which have plagued the scholarship. These theoretical debates have hindered progress on the practical matters which affect litigants in the real world. The dissertation is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is a historical study of common-law fictions. The conclusions drawn thereform are the foundation of the acceptance test for fictions. The second chapter deals with the theoretical problems surrounding the fiction. Chiefly, it seeks precisely to define 'legal fiction', a recurrent problem in the literature. A solution, in the form of a two-pronged definition, is proposed, adding an important element to the acceptance test. The third chapter analyses modern-day fictions and recommends retention or abolition for each fiction. In the fourth chapter, the findings hitherto are synthesised into a general acceptance test for fictions. This test, which is the thesis of this work, is presented as a flowchart. It is the author's hope that this project will raise awareness as to the merits and demerits of legal fictions, de-mystify the debate and bring about reform.

ABSTRACT Background: Previous criminal justice policies have been non-effective leading to overpopulated prisons and unsuccessful reintegration. There is a lack of effective supportive and/or rehabilitative services resulting in high rates of recidivism and mental health implications. Objective: This study investigated the perceived impact that incarceration and reintegration with little to no supportive and/or rehabilitative services has on the mental health status of an individual. The emphasis was on participant perception and not on professional reports because of underreporting and lack of attention to mental health in the criminal justice system. Methods: Focus groups in the Inland Empire and Coachella Valley were held to gather preliminary data used to develop the survey for this study. The survey was distributed to 88 male and female ex-offenders over the age of 18 who were no longer on probation or parole. Secondary data from United Way 211 and California State Reentry Initiative was collected to report current trends of supportive and/or rehabilitative services. Results: Incarceration was found to negatively impact perceived mental health status, but reintegration was not. Supportive and/or rehabilitative services continue to be rarely offered and accessed, but when accessed, perceived mental health status is better. Supportive and/or rehabilitative services are more readily available. People who are using these services are improving their quality of life, becoming productive members of society, and preventing recidivism. Conclusions: A paradigm shift is currently under way to reduce recidivism by improving supportive and/or rehabilitative services during incarceration and reintegration. Many offenders are receiving services as an alternative to incarceration, recidivism rates are being reduced, and ex-offenders are becoming productive members of society. The field of social work is an integral part of reentry services and should continue advocating for policies and services that support reintegration efforts at the micro and macro level.

In August 2000, Justice O�Loughlin of the Federal Court of Australia handed down the decision in Cubillo v Commonwealth in which Lorna Cubillo and Peter Gunner took action against the Commonwealth Government, arguing that it was vicariously liable for their removal from their families and communities as children and subsequent detentions in the Northern Territory during the 1940s and 1950s. The case is the landmark decision in relation to legal action taken by members of the Stolen Generations. Using the decision in Cubillo as a key site of contestation, my thesis provides a critique of legal positivism as the dominant jurisprudential discourse operating within the Anglo-Australian legal system. I argue that the function of legal positivism as the principal paradigm and source of authority for the decision serves to ensure that the debate concerning reconciliation in Australia operates rhetorically to maintain whiteness at the centre of political and discursive power. Specifically concerned with the performative function of legal discourse, the thesis is an interrogation of the interface of law and language, of rhetoric, and the semiotics of legal discourse. The dominant theory of evidence law is a rationalist and empiricist epistemology in which oral testimony and documentary evidence are regarded as mediating the relationship between proof and truth. I argue that by attributing primacy to principles of rationality, objectivity and narrative coherence, and by privileging that which is visually represented, the decision serves an ideological purpose which diminishes the significance of race in the construction of knowledge. Legal positivism identifies the knowing subject and the object of knowledge as discrete entities. However, I argue that in Cubillo, Justice O�Loughlin inscribes himself into the text of the judgment and in doing so, reveals the way in which textual and corporeal specificities undermine the pretence of objective judgment and therefore the source of judicial authority.

This thesis examines how the Supreme Court of Canada, across legal contexts, has tended to conceptualize sexuality. It focuses primarily on areas of public law including sexual assault law, equality for sexual minorities, sexual harassment and obscenity and indecency laws. There were a number of trends revealed upon reviewing the jurisprudence in this area. First, the Court’s decisions across legal contexts reveal a tendency to conceptualize sexuality as innate, as a pre-social naturally occurring phenomenon and as an essential element of who we are as individuals. This is true whether one is speaking of the approach to gay and lesbian rights, the occurrence of sexual harassment, or the sexual abuse of children. However, there is an exception to this trend. The exception relates to the Court’s conceptual approach towards sexual violence against adults. The research revealed, likely as a result of feminist activism both in the legislative and judicial arenas, that there has been a shift in the way that the Court understands sexuality in the context of sexual violence. It is a shift away from understanding it as pre-social and naturally occurring towards understanding it as a product of society, as a function of social context. This change in the Court’s conceptual approach towards sexual violence has engendered a shift in the law’s moral focus as well – a shift away from a moral focus on specific sexual acts and sexual propriety and towards a moral focus on sexual actors and sexual integrity. The thesis weaves together the analytical observations about the jurisprudence just described with a theoretical argument that is both grounded in the case law and which draws upon a number of different theorists. The argument developed suggests that the Court, regardless of the legal issue involved, ought to conceptualize sexuality as socially constructed/ contextually contingent, that it ought to orient itself towards protecting sexual integrity, and that it ought to understand this sexual integrity as a common interest.

In August 2000, Justice O�Loughlin of the Federal Court of Australia handed down the decision in Cubillo v Commonwealth in which Lorna Cubillo and Peter Gunner took action against the Commonwealth Government, arguing that it was vicariously liable for their removal from their families and communities as children and subsequent detentions in the Northern Territory during the 1940s and 1950s. The case is the landmark decision in relation to legal action taken by members of the Stolen Generations. Using the decision in Cubillo as a key site of contestation, my thesis provides a critique of legal positivism as the dominant jurisprudential discourse operating within the Anglo-Australian legal system. I argue that the function of legal positivism as the principal paradigm and source of authority for the decision serves to ensure that the debate concerning reconciliation in Australia operates rhetorically to maintain whiteness at the centre of political and discursive power. Specifically concerned with the performative function of legal discourse, the thesis is an interrogation of the interface of law and language, of rhetoric, and the semiotics of legal discourse. The dominant theory of evidence law is a rationalist and empiricist epistemology in which oral testimony and documentary evidence are regarded as mediating the relationship between proof and truth. I argue that by attributing primacy to principles of rationality, objectivity and narrative coherence, and by privileging that which is visually represented, the decision serves an ideological purpose which diminishes the significance of race in the construction of knowledge. Legal positivism identifies the knowing subject and the object of knowledge as discrete entities. However, I argue that in Cubillo, Justice O�Loughlin inscribes himself into the text of the judgment and in doing so, reveals the way in which textual and corporeal specificities undermine the pretence of objective judgment and therefore the source of judicial authority.